Real West Ham Fans Action Group: Official Thread

Chat about anything football related here!
User avatar
Whiskyman
Posts: 5430
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby Whiskyman » Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:16 am

As if to prove a point someone else made about "real" fans. This is one journo who the RWHFAG should have got on their side. He genuinely does have a feeling for West Ham.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... l-fan.html
0 x
People who claim to be modest usually have a lot to be modest about.

User avatar
Oziron
Director of Avatars
Posts: 1874
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 9:37 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby Oziron » Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:43 am

Whiskyman wrote:As if to prove a point someone else made about "real" fans. This is one journo who the RWHFAG should have got on their side. He genuinely does have a feeling for West Ham.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... l-fan.html

Good to see a few Hammerschat faces in that photo.... 8-) 8-) 8-)
0 x

User avatar
eskimo joe
Posts: 4223
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 7:37 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby eskimo joe » Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:38 am

Whiskyman wrote:As if to prove a point someone else made about "real" fans. This is one journo who the RWHFAG should have got on their side. He genuinely dose have a feeling for West Ham.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... l-fan.html


Used to think so but what I could read of that article he sounds like a board nosher that missed the point and is making a fuss over a word that if certain intonations were used could be taken different ways.

It's not the word that is important, unless you feel insulted by the way you choose to take it, its the sentiments, and I think our grievance isn't as he would have some believe the move to the stadium , I think the majority, not all, but the majority realized that to ADVANCE we would have to move. But the only advance seen is the amount of ST holders and the money going into the black hole called Sullivans pocket. Not a solid attempt to progress where, as a team, it matters

One grievance, why move and sit stagnant when you could have achieved the same at Upton Park. People have drawn their own conclusions by the actions of the board which are or appear very much to be in stark contrast to the rhetoric they spewed out pre move. MONEY! and for whom? As the saying goes "Actions Speak Louder Than Words" and their actions seem to have only one thing to say.
0 x
A good person does things in silence, others strive to be seen as good so scream out their deeds.

User avatar
whu
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 10:20 am

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby whu » Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:59 am

JustLikeMyDreams wrote:
Newmarket wrote:i am genuinely amused at last some common sense .

In The Grove early doors mate with Rab C Nesbitt and others. Get there lively. Bacon's getting the breakfasts in (not that he knows that yet) :lol: whufc_crest
















Emphasising the word common of course :i am genuinely amused:

See you on the 10th ;)

Yes mate!We can go together if your about early enough mate?Maybe meet Woo and Longshanks on the train at Grays ;) Let me know your plans?
0 x
Land based game. Pass and move. Simple.
Want a launching? Try NASA or Firework night.
We're West Ham. It's what we want. Now and always. Amen.

User avatar
whu
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 10:20 am

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby whu » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:12 am

Whiskyman wrote:As if to prove a point someone else made about "real" fans. This is one journo who the RWHFAG should have got on their side. He genuinely does have a feeling for West Ham.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... l-fan.html


huge part of the groups job is done, message properly getting out there.

let's bang this fucking issue, shall we .... 'real' was meant as in the supporters are real and the board are not real supporters. also, I think the intention is to remove the word 'real' at some stage.
Last edited by whu on Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
1 x
Land based game. Pass and move. Simple.
Want a launching? Try NASA or Firework night.
We're West Ham. It's what we want. Now and always. Amen.

User avatar
Whiskyman
Posts: 5430
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby Whiskyman » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:28 am

eskimo joe wrote:
Whiskyman wrote:As if to prove a point someone else made about "real" fans. This is one journo who the RWHFAG should have got on their side. He genuinely dose have a feeling for West Ham.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... l-fan.html


Used to think so but what I could read of that article he sounds like a board nosher that missed the point and is making a fuss over a word that if certain intonations were used could be taken different ways.

It's not the word that is important, unless you feel insulted by the way you choose to take it, its the sentiments, and I think our grievance isn't as he would have some believe the move to the stadium , I think the majority, not all, but the majority realized that to ADVANCE we would have to move. But the only advance seen is the amount of ST holders and the money going into the black hole called Sullivans pocket. Not a solid attempt to progress where, as a team, it matters

One grievance, why move and sit stagnant when you could have achieved the same at Upton Park. People have drawn their own conclusions by the actions of the board which are or appear very much to be in stark contrast to the rhetoric they spewed out pre move. MONEY! and for whom? As the saying goes "Actions Speak Louder Than Words" and their actions seem to have only one thing to say.


I don't think MS is in any way a board nosher. And although I'm not offended by the use of the word "real" others have shown themselves to be a bit sensitive to it.

As for the "where's the money gone" argument I think we often miss the point. Owners have every right to take money out of their business. That isn't board noshing, that is an unquestionable statement of fact. My personal dislike of everything the dwarf stands for is the fact he treats me, and all those like me who support the club, as a fucking retard. He lies and expects me to lap it up[ like some grateful distant relative opening his present on Christmas Day. Put simply don't expect everyone to believe the "did it for love" argument. We know you did it for personal gain. Only a simpleton would believe otherwise. It's simply how business works. So don't make the mistake of treating us all as simpletons who believe everything you say.

The rhetoric about advancement which you have mentioned is only one such example. I think the power of the media is a very useful tool if used correctly.
0 x
People who claim to be modest usually have a lot to be modest about.

User avatar
Whiskyman
Posts: 5430
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 2:05 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby Whiskyman » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:31 am

whu wrote:
Whiskyman wrote:As if to prove a point someone else made about "real" fans. This is one journo who the RWHFAG should have got on their side. He genuinely does have a feeling for West Ham.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... l-fan.html


huge part of the groups job is done, message properly getting out there.

let's bang this fucking issue, shall we .... 'real' was meant as in the supporters are real and the board are not. also, I think the intention is to remove the word 'real' at some stage.


Can I suggest West Ham Action Movement ? WHAM has a nice sound to it. I know it's a bit gimmicky but sometimes an acronym works well.

Although I do realise I've opened the fucking bottle for all sorts of ideas to come along now. ;)
0 x
People who claim to be modest usually have a lot to be modest about.

User avatar
eskimo joe
Posts: 4223
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 7:37 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby eskimo joe » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:37 am

We know where the money has gone, don't think we miss the point, its not where it's. gone that's pissed people off so much it's where it was promised. The argument about making money can only go so far. Taking people for fools, the same.
1 x
A good person does things in silence, others strive to be seen as good so scream out their deeds.

User avatar
Newmarket
Posts: 9319
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 10:03 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby Newmarket » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:37 am

Woo explained the REAL bit the way I was going to and beat me to it .
I think an official statement to that effect needs to be made on this poste haste before other Sullivan noshing press boys jump on that particular bandwagon .

Just my opinion .


Oh and meeting in the boozer 3 hours before the march ? Sounds like a highly sensible thing to do .

Not.
1 x
I hate Thrush he’s an irritating Cunt .

User avatar
frogiron
Posts: 1015
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 12:02 pm

Re: Real West Ham Fans : Official Thread (update page 35)

Postby frogiron » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:49 am

whu wrote: 'real' was meant as in the supporters are real and the board are not. also, I think the intention is to remove the word 'real' at some stage.


Personally (and I accept it may be me who has made a big thing of this - on here anyway) I think that would be a good move Woo.

There will always be a wide cross section of people following and interested in a football club. Some will be more diplomatic about how they present themselves, some less so. And there will be some who have hard views about what constitutes a "fan". I have been accused of not being one - which was a surprise to me, and made me wonder what the fuck I'd been doing for the past 50 years getting angry and excited at the shenanigans of WHU, but there we go.

The problem is that when such views are played to a wider, perhaps less knowing, audience - which they will be if the the group's activities gain any decent coverage - they will simply ensure that more sensible and balanced demands and issues are diluted or ignored.

This is an area I know a lot about. Any broadcast has a very limited time to get a message across. Any News Editor looking to cover this story will look for the extremes, the drama - that's what sells (If it bleeds, it leads). If he gets a bit of footage with a shaven headed, monosyllabic bloke shouting about "plastic fans" and calling Brady sexist or disparaging names, that is what will feature on the news, because that is the drama. There will then, as is common, be a right of response by the board, with a calm and measured Brady or Sullivan coming across as the voice of reason.

Get someone like the poster who was telling me he wanted new fans with mobile phones not to attend the matches on screen, and we are well on our way to being presented as lumpen relics of the 80s.

Honestly mate, I do know what I'm talking about with this (unlike most things I bang on about). And it is a dot on the cards unless you - or those in charge - get a handle on how to present yourselves and your case.

One guaranteed way of convincing the board that they should not be dealing with a fan group is to suggest that the fan groups wish to limit their ability to attract new customers.
1 x
GTFOOOCYTPPOC


Return to “Football Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: andyginbrasil, Newmarket, smiffy252 and 15 guests